Barton

Barton v. Alexander Hamilton Life Insurance

Good Law
110 Cal. App. 4th 1640·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 1196·2003 Daily Journal DAR 8803·3 Cal. Rptr. 3d 258·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7046
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 10, 2003E030085California1,517 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hollenhorst, J.

A jury found in favor of plaintiff Richard Barton on causes of action for fraud (false promise and intentional misrepresentation) and negligent misrepresentation. The jury awarded plaintiff Barton compensatory damages of $866,840.25.

Defendant Alexander Hamilton Life Insurance Company of America (Hamilton) filed a motion for a new trial on the issue of damages. The trial court granted the motion after finding that the damages were excessive within the meaning of Code of Civil Procedure section 657, subdivisions (5) and (6).

Mr. Barton appeals. Although he does not “particularly oppose” the trial court’s initial granting of a new trial on all damages issues, he does oppose a subsequent “clarification” of the trial court’s order which would limit the new trial to compensatory damages only.

Hamilton filed a cross-appeal from the judgment entered against it, including an attack on various rulings of the trial court.

ALLEGATIONS OF THE COMPLAINT AND SPECIAL VERDICTS

On October 31, 1996, Mr. Barton filed a 54-page first amended complaint for damages against Hamilton, Roger McCall, and others. The complaint alleged that Mr. McCall was a licensed life insurance agent and/or…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.